"For their experiment, Shin and his colleagues used pine and poplar boards from a local lumber store, cutting the wood into small cubic samples. Once the samples were cleaned and cut, they were soaked in hydrochloric acid for two days and then soaked in silica solution for another two days. After the wood had been air-dried, the pieces were placed into a furnace filled with argon gas and steadily heated to 1400 degrees Celsius, where the samples baked for two hours."

I have wondered what would cause so much silicon to be in the water when most of the fossils and petrified forests were submerged.

(Okay, my husband says, "How long to fossilize two cats?")

“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”~Homer

I have wondered what would cause so much silicon to be in the water when most of the fossils and petrified forests were submerged.

* Silicon is the most common element in Earth's crust and, megalightning can pulverize most rock, which would scatter a lot of silicon powder, along with other elemental powders, over a wide area. What do you think of that?* I'm wondering if the acid is necessary for fossilization.* You asked in your last post:

how did fossils get from another island and then ride the magma to get deposited on a newly formed island?!

* I think the article says the rock containing fossils came up with magma in the volcano that formed the island. I don't think the rock came from a different island or land. The rock broke off of a sedimentary layer through which the magma erupted. It says bore holes in the area found such a layer some hundreds of meters below sea level, I think. So the layer apparently extends under the new island too and that's where the piece of rock apparently broke off and rode to the surface. Here's the image of the rock: http://www.vulkaner.no/n/surtsey/pics/fossilblock.jpg.* It would be interesting if those fossils had formed during the magma eruption, but, since they're in sedimentary rock, they apparently are old fossils, rather than newly fossilized.

cigarshaped wrote:My other concern, slightly off base, is explaining the lower gravity conditions that must be necessary for these enormous lifeforms to exist. I haven't searched the entire forum for this discussion yet. Until we have (or I read) an electrically adjustable gravity theory I just go with a faster rotating earth....

Not to go too far out on a limb, but if mass is variable under Thornhill's interpretations, then might gravity (which seems to depend on mass) also be variable in kind?

We now return you to your regularly schedule discussion of fossils, et al.

Regards,~Michael

Most certainly, Recently declassified experiments in microgravity have been said to have been preformed in Skylab which showed a charged sphere has gravity. Directly variable according to voltage input.

However, given that, and given the Ica Stone of Peru (not all of them) show Dinosaur like animals, combined with known and potentially datable plasma discharge phenomenon, it's safe to assume that Patagonia (a recently struck area) might have been, along with North America, been the last refuge of not only megafauna, but dinosaurs.

The Indians "Water Buffalo" for example is said to bear striking resemblance to a Triceratops.

Given that we have historical references to giants (mega-man) and the existence of Megafauna, is it not conceivable that the dinosaurs succumbed to the same problems, gravity increasing, combined with horrific plasma devastation that would have occurred during the 'Clash of the Titans'?

I'm willing to debate it. However, given the 'extinct' species that keep popping up, as might want to look at the idea that, like megafauna, and megaman, their genome expressed differently in a lower voltage environment. Perhaps dinosaurs are all around us, just much smaller.

"* Silicon is the most common element in Earth's crust and, megalightning can pulverize most rock, which would scatter a lot of silicon powder, along with other elemental powders, over a wide area. What do you think of that?"

I think you all have lightning on the brain around here! ;)

For silicon levels to get really high, what I was looking for Lloyd, was a vast amount of water and silicon to appear suddenly from within the earth.

In some cases the sea water was so saturated that gem-quality opal fossils were formed (as in Australia). I could be barking up the wrong tree, but I thought the water and the silicon coincided in a flood somehow, and I just assumed that it came from inside the earth. The enormity of the electrical discharges that EU is talking about is slowly dawning on me, so I suppose some megalightning would do nicely to blast silicon into the atmosphere, as you said, but why would it coincide with a deluge? What has water got to do with interplanetary arcing?

Put that another way, in my simplistic guess work, the unusually high silicon and water came from the same source at the same time. :)

I don't know what everyone believes about mass extinctions around here. In my view, there were at least 2 worldwide floods (Gen 1:2 and Noachian) and a change in gravitational conditions that killed off everything over a certain size. If gravity changes with electromagnetic conditions ("Electric Gravity" already mentioned), then I think that favors earth having been captured by the Sun. Please don't cross examine me about Halton Arp's mass increasing with time in quantum increments, or Wal Thornhill's subatomic changes in mass. Thank you.

I have always thought that less gravity does not entirely explain the loveliness and lushness of life on the earth in the past (as shown in the fossil record--not off topic I hope!), or the long lifespans of the megafauna. I think the atmosphere may have been very rich in nitrogen, which is a wonderful preservative. Apples stored in nitrogen can last for 30 months. And of course I am a huge fan of MiracleGro. :) I thought perhaps the earth expanded and thinned out the atmosphere. But in EU, lightning can lift away and deposite gases and mineral layers.

“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”~Homer

"* Silicon is the most common element in Earth's crust and, megalightning can pulverize most rock, which would scatter a lot of silicon powder, along with other elemental powders, over a wide area. What do you think of that?"

I think you all have lightning on the brain around here!

(snip)

I have always thought that less gravity does not entirely explain the loveliness and lushness of life on the earth in the past (as shown in the fossil record--not off topic I hope!), or the long lifespans of the megafauna. I think the atmosphere may have been very rich in nitrogen, which is a wonderful preservative. Apples stored in nitrogen can last for 30 months. And of course I am a huge fan of MiracleGro. I thought perhaps the earth expanded and thinned out the atmosphere. But in EU, lightning can lift away and deposite gases and mineral layers.

Also, should a sustained strike be hitting predominantly water based areas, the vaporization and heating of large amounts of water would, I would suspect, change the atmosphere for the better. At least while it lasted. I suspect "Eden"-like conditions would result. Looking at those "Biblical Science" sites showed me a few people trying to grow animals and plants in double atmospheric pressure environments, combining it with a pulsed electrical charge caused the animals to grow to very large sizes (two times as large at least). I do not want people to think I am proposing this for biblical reasons. However, this work is impressive in its own right, and lends credence to this whole discussion. That being the case, check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N63lhtx2q8o&Go to about 9 minutes in and by the time it gets to the end you will see the apparatus he used to create this effect. I'm not a fan of the "spooky bible language" and assumptions within it, but I like the fact that they get funding and can do these experiments. Even though they are biased from the get go, this work is beneficial those who cannot afford to replicate it. (Like us )

About two weeks ago I started a search for the phrase "biological transmutation" and got lost following many links, so I can't remember specific links to point to, but in essence fossilization is due to transmutation of the tissues into silicon and such, thus preserving the form. As was pointed out further up this thread, you can have a mix of fossil bones and regular bones, that's only possible if the fossilization process is more "organic" than we realize.<--Pun intended.

Kervran has discovered some biological transmutations involving elements that suggest a possible pathway for silification without introducing silica from outside. These involve the production of Si from C and O, or from N2. Leo says that Scurfield et al. (1974) "observed that silica particles often occur with starch grains or with polyphenolic material in the same cell, and suggested a causal relationship to be operative" (Leo, supra, p. 47). This is consistent with the idea that carbon and oxygen in the cell in the form of starch grains (carbohydrates) and polyphenolic material (hydrocarbons with oxygen) combine to form silica. (N2 C + O; C+O Si). Such transmutations occurring locally within the cell, each of them in a nano-space, seems more consistent with the preservation of microscopic cell structure that often occurs in silification and petrification, than if the silica came in from outside the dead tree cell to replace carbohydrates in the cell that are somehow driven out of the dead cell. Other more recent experiments using bacteria or yeasts to cause petrification have reported petrification within a period of about three years using wood soaked in the residue from making beer, and embedded in sand. Here the silica in sand may play a role mentioned above by Kervran of assisting the transmutation by overcoming an enzyme that otherwise would block the transmutation, as explained by Monod and Jacob.

In conclusion, there is now extensive evidence that microbes are ubiquitous through the crust of the earth, and that they play a major role in a great many geological processes and formations. There is also excellent experimental evidence that microbes in numerous cases perform transmutations of elements so as to produce such formations. Most microbiologists are not aware of the theory, even though the evidence unmistakably favors the theory as the only reasonable explanation. However, biological transmutations is like the elephant in a room that no one will talk about because the theory appears to violate the laws of physics. Yet when consistently reproducible facts violate a theory, it is time to reexamine the theory. Microbiologists and geomicrobiologists do often admit that the phenomena they are describing defy an explanation, and they generally come up with speculative solutions, such as the theory that microbes "concentrate" minerals, or the minerals "migrate", and other unproven statements. In my opinion, these phenomena should be studied thoroughly with an open mind, and a concerted effort should be made to reexamine our theories of the atom to see if one might be devised that could explain the facts of transmutations as well as other natural phenomena.

Krackonis wrote:Most certainly, Recently declassified experiments in microgravity have been said to have been preformed in Skylab which showed a charged sphere has gravity. Directly variable according to voltage input.

Got a cite perchance?

Regards,~Michael Gmirkin

"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke"For every PhD there is an equal and oppositePhD." ~Gibson's law

I suppose some megalightning would do nicely to blast silicon into the atmosphere, as you said, but why would it coincide with a deluge? What has water got to do with interplanetary arcing?

* Most of Earth's water was held in the polar plasma column during the late stage of the Saturn Age, at least as I understand the TB team's findings.* If you go to this webpage: http://www.kronia.com/thoth/ThotIV02.txt and read the article titled, "THE DEMANDS OF THE SATURNIAN CONFIGURATION THEORY: Part II", I think you'll get a pretty good understanding of the theory.* There apparently was very little water on Earth during the Saturn Age. The ocean basins show signs of electric discharges at least down the continental slopes near to the seafloor. I don't think discharges can do much under water, as the energy would probably dissipate, rather than concentrate. Velikovsky mentioned volcanic lava was found on the mid-Atlantic ridge that solidified in air, not in water. That ridge is at least a mile deep at the very top. So that must have been above water when the lava formed.* So it seems to me that electric discharges must have carved the features onto the continental slopes etc just before the polar column collapsed, releasing the flood waters.* The polar column collapsed and the megalightning occurred as a result of planetary orbit instabilities within the Saturn System, which caused one or more planetoids of Saturn to make a close approach to Earth, causing arcing.* If you get the idea of flood waters coming from within the Earth from the Bible, the fountains of the Great Deep are almost certainly misinterpreted, because, to the ancients, the Great Deep was the sky where they witnessed the rain and flood waters coming from. Cardona confirms this.

Yeah, but Cardona is just a guy, like you and me. I'm with Brigit.On another note, petrifaction happens quickly [in hours or days, as shown in lab experiments] under the right conditions of chemical concentration, heat and pressure, and/or with the appropriate silica-rich catalyst, such as clay or volcanic ash. In my state [Washington] petrified wood is the state gem, and is found in a variety of layers [gravelly, sandy, clayey] betwixt basalt lava flows, and/or/also in volcanic ash, in geologically "conformable" situations that defy explanations of eons of time. I have a box of rocks in my classroom including coalified and petrified wood, from the 1980 eruption of Mt. St. Helens, gleaned from ash in the logjam area near Spirit Lake. I also have chunks of diatomaceous earth [and derivative diatomaceous opal] from eastern Washington, found in diatomite beds that are lensed between conformable lava flows. The "chalky" textured d.earth surrounds the d. opal both above and below, indicating IMO that the opal was formed chemically due to superheating from both above and below the diatomite bed, due to the presence of "still hot" basalt. Water flowing over, in, through and around these silica rich strata provides ample concentration of silica for petrifaction of entrapped organic debris, eg wood and what the locals call "bog". Now mineral replacement of organic material must IMO be at least enhanced by if not essentially caused by electrical/electrolytical changes inside and out of the organic debris.

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

"...carbon and oxygen in the cell in the form of starch grains (carbohydrates) and polyphenolic material (hydrocarbons with oxygen) combine to form silica. (N2 C + O; C+O Si). Such transmutations occurring locally within the cell, each of them in a nano-space, seems more consistent with the preservation of microscopic cell structure that often occurs in silification and petrification, than if the silica came in from outside the dead tree cell to replace carbohydrates in the cell that are somehow driven out of the dead cell."

I have just had one of my blinding flashes! Suppose the "dirty little secret" about fossilization is that massive heat is required? These fellows are trying to explain something away, is what I think they are doing.

Lloyd, thank you for that link. I had no idea that the mud layer in the northern hemisphere was so deep, and mixed with the remains of plants and animals. 4000'. Do you and Krackonis agree about whether there was some kind of tide in the north, or a "Rankine vortex"? I suppose since the moon controls the tide, that if earth were orbiting Saturn, than the water would really be tugged one way.

“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”~Homer

"transmutations occurring locally within the cell [seem more plausible] than if the silica came in from outside the dead tree cell to replace carbohydrates in the cell that are somehow driven out of the dead cell."

* I see you looked through some of the Thoth back issues. This quote does seem more plausible than that the silica came from sea water or from pulverized rock powder and sea water.

Suppose the "dirty little secret" about fossilization is that massive heat is required?

* Nice flash. And it's catching. Kervran found that heat is the probable cause of transmutation of N2 to CO. N2 is nitrogen in the air. Heat from welding or even a hot wood stove can heat the nitrogen enough to cause one proton to move from one of the nitrogen atoms to the other. The atom that loses the proton becomes carbon; the other becomes oxygen. Kervran warned welders and others who work around high heat to have fresh air pumped in to prevent CO [carbon monoxide] poisoning.* In all of the other cases of transmutation that his book reported, the cause seemed to be bacterial or enzymatic action, i.e. biological transmutation.* Lightning definitely appears to cause transmutation too, as that is what appears to produce sulphur in volcanic eruptions as well as the red sulphurs on Io and Europa. In Earth volcanoes the sulphur seems to come from oxygen molecules in the air, where 8 O 16 + 8 O 16 = 16 S 32 [O is Oxygen; S is Sulphur; 8, 16 & 32 are the numbers of protons and nucleons]. On Io and Europa the oxygen apparently comes from H2O, i.e. ice. Lightning also seems to transmute Si to Fe in the case of some large fulgarites etc.* So in the case of petrified wood etc, the transmutation could be a result of either heat, or electricity, or biology. Biology is greatly dependent on electricity, so even that may involve electrical transmutation. Heat is also produced by lighning. Since a TPOD a few weeks or so ago indicated that even sticky tape, when pulled apart, produces tiny electrical arcing, it seems possible that heated air may also involve such arcing.

Do you and Krackonis agree about whether there was some kind of tide in the north, or a "Rankine vortex"? I suppose since the moon controls the tide, that if earth were orbiting Saturn, than the water would really be tugged one way.

* I believe the main Saturn theorists have found that our Moon was probably not orbiting the Earth during the Saturn age and, at least in the last few centuries or millennia of the Saturn age, Earth was not orbiting Saturn, but was just being pulled behind it, like Venus and Mars were too. The Moon was probably orbiting Saturn or Jupiter at that time. The TB team found that Venus and Mars were also on or close to the polar axis between Earth and Saturn. Saturn may have been closer than the Moon is now, so all three bodies would have appeared very large in the sky and would have had much stronger tidal pull than the Moon now has. However, it doesn't seem to be at all certain yet whether electrical forces would have increased or decreased such tidal forces. If electrical forces didn't affect the tidal force, then the 3 planets would have had a force probably at least 10 times stronger than the Moon's present force, maybe 100 times stronger or more. Tidal forces build up fluids on both sides of a body, so if the tidal pull were over the north pole, it would have had the same effect at the south pole.* I think the Rankine vortex idea was one of their earlier ideas, which they've apparently modified to a plasma column, although a vortex would be like a tornado, and they've found that tornadoes, dust devils and the like are actually electrically powered. So I suppose a plasma column could also act like a tornado, which seems to be what Cardona still supposes.* Webolife said: "Cardona is just a guy, like you and me."* Cardona and Talbott both started out as skeptics of Velikovsky. They both found independently that Velikovsky was wrong about Venus and Mars encountering the Earth in the last 3500 years, but that he was right about Saturn being involved in earlier catastrophes, which he never published, that I know of. Cardona has a great deal of knowledge of mythology, which I'm guessing is not true of you and me. Arrogant astronomers were unable to disprove Velikovsky's claims about Venus and Mars, but Cardona said, if they'd asked mythologists to critique him, they could have easily disproven those particular claims. I've been reading Cardona and others on catastrophism since the mid 70s and I haven't found much if anything by him that seems unrealistic. I still have all those magazines too and I reread some of them occasionally. The kronia.com site is even better than those magazines, for the most part, though.

The stuff on transmutations is showing that pressure, heat, electricity, bacteria, living cells, make matter infinitely mutable. Bacteria eating iron and making manganese. Chicken eggs where the growing chick takes potassium to make calcium bones. Read through the the thread I mentioned and the links they point to. Once you can wrap your brain around the concept that transmutation of elements occurs at low energies a bunch of things start making sense, and the implications are profound.

The concept of dating anything using radioactive half-life is no longer absolute when the material tested may be newly minted.

Lloyd, thank you for that explanation of the Saturn Theory and the time frame involved. You don't know how handy that is for me! It is not that I am lazy and won't look it up, but I have so much else to read and understand about the Electric Universe right now, including the books and the sites provided. So your thumbnail sketch was most welcome!

allynh, Mea culpa, I do need to read about biological transmutation. It is a difficult thing for me. I am stuck on silicon.

It seems like silica fits in with the petrified forests and the fossils, and that it not only was suspended in the water as muck and stuff, but was dissolved in it in high concentration, so that it could replace even cell structures. It also seems to me that the sands of the Sahara Desert (quartz?) would have been formed at the same time, and over all, quartz was everywhere.

It still is, but we don't see THAT much sand being formed--at least not covering huge regions of the continents; and the ground water of today would not make very good fossils, would it? So is there a big layer of Si inside of the earth providing a new source for it, during a planetary catastrophe?*

But maybe you all hold that the sand that covered so much of the world recently was not from flooding, erosion, and volcanic action, but from the thunderbolts--in a separate event from the deluge that preserved so many fossils.

Well, so much for my shoestring theories. :)

*ref: Marklund convection, pg 230 of Electric Sky

“Oh for shame, how these mortals put the blame upon us gods, for they say evils come from us, when it is they rather who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given…”~Homer